The response of Monterey Bay to the 2010 Chilean earthquake

Downloaded 27 times.

Primary tabs

Breaker, L. C., Murty, T. S., Flora, S. J., & Hunter, C. N. (2011). The response of Monterey Bay to the 2010 Chilean earthquake. Science of Tsunami Hazards, 30(1), 1-23.
TitleThe response of Monterey Bay to the 2010 Chilean earthquake
AuthorsL. Breaker, T. Murty, S. Flora, C. Hunter
AbstractThe primary frequencies contained in the arrival sequence produced by the tsunami from the Chilean earthquake of 2010 in Monterey Bay were extracted to determine the seiche modes that were produced. Singular Spectrum Analysis (SSA) and Ensemble Empirical Mode Decomposition (EEMD) were employed to extract the primary frequencies of interest. The wave train from the Chilean tsunami lasted for at least four days due to multipath arrivals that may not have included reflections from outside the bay but most likely did include secondary undulations, and energy trapping in the form of edge waves, inside the bay. The SSA decomposition resolved oscillations with periods of 52-57, 34-35, 26-27, and 21-22 minutes, all frequencies that have been predicted and/or observed in previous studies. The EEMD decomposition detected oscillations with periods of 50-55 and 21-22 minutes. Periods in the range of 50-57 minutes varied due to measurement uncertainties but almost certainly correspond to the first longitudinal mode of oscillation for Monterey Bay, periods of 34-35 minutes correspond to the first transverse mode of oscillation that assumes a nodal line across the entrance of the bay, a period of 26- 27 minutes, although previously observed, may not represent a fundamental oscillation, and a period of 21-22 minutes has been predicted and observed previously. A period of ~37 minutes, close to the period of 34-35 minutes, was generated by the Great Alaskan Earthquake of 1964 in Monterey Bay and most likely represents the same mode of oscillation. The tsunamis associated with the Great Alaskan Earthquake and the Chilean Earthquake both entered Monterey Bay but initially arrived outside the bay from opposite directions. Unlike the Great Alaskan Earthquake, however, which excited only one resonant mode inside the bay, the Chilean Earthquake excited several modes suggesting that the asymmetric shape of the entrance to Monterey Bay was an important factor and that the directions of the incoming tsunami-generated waves were most likely different. The results from SSA and EEMD produced results that differed. Although a period of 34-35 minutes was observed in the SSA, it was not detected in the EEMD. In previous comparisons, however, we have observed that oscillations detected in EEMD were not detected in SSA. SSA also revealed an oscillation with a period of 26-27 minutes, not observed in the EEMD. This oscillation, however, may not represent a fundamental mode but instead a harmonic related to the first longitudinal mode of oscillation whose period is ~55 minutes. We conclude that both methods were useful in helping to interpret the results of this study.
JournalScience of Tsunami Hazards
Start page1
End page23
NoteCited By (since 1996):2, Oceanography